Contr. Celf. L. PLAIN QUESTIONS. I. Where are the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost called One God, in the Scripture, or the moft primitive Writers? I defire but one plain Inftance. II. Where is Chrift faid to be properly Equal to the Father, in Scripture, or the Moft Primitive Writers? I defire but one plain Inftance. III. Where is Chrift called by any of the known Titles or Epithets of the Supreme God? fuch as, God the Creator; the Invisible God; the True God, (annivòs Oeds) the Blessed, or the Blessed God; the Eternal God; the One God; the Only God; the Living God; the Good God; the God of Heaven; the God over all; the Wife God; the Immortal God; the Higheft, &c. either in the New Testament, or the moft Primitive Writers? I defire a few plain Inftances. IV. Where do the Scriptures or moft Primitive Writers fay any thing of the Substance or Effence of God; and where do they affirm the Father and Son to be Coeffential and Confubftantial? One plain Inftance is only defir'd. V. By what new Revelation did the Council of Nice confecrate the Word usor, when it had beed directly rejected by the Council of Antioch fo long before? VI. Whether it be a Sign of the facred Authority of the fame is that it was therefore introduc'd, because it was known that a great Part of the Chriftian Church highly disapprov'd of it? VII. How the Sameness or Equality of the Son with the Father, which in the days of Origen, VIII. p. was barely the mistake of a few rafh Chriftians, 387. can can now become a fundamental Article of the Chriftian Faith? VIII. How the Eternal Generation of the Son of God, which was fo utterly unknown at the Council of Nice, came to be in latter times advanc'd into a fundamental Doctrine of Chriftianity? IX. How it comes to pass that the known Herefy of Cerinthus, in denying the Sufferings of the Divine Nature of our Saviour, is now fo current and Orthodox Doctrine in our Days? X. Where is the Holy Ghoft directly called God or Lord, in the Scripture or moft Primitive Writers. I defire but one plain Inftance? XI. What one Chriftian till fome time after the Council of Nice, ever ventur'd to Invocate the Holy Ghoft? A Single Inftance is here alone defired also. XII. How it comes about that we efteem those and only thofe Doctrines Orthodox in thefe Matters, which are approv'd and establish'd by the Church of Rome? and this at a time when Antichriftianifm was rifing apace in her. XIII. How it comes to pafs in particular,that a Creed made under Antichriftianism, and not received till it was at the height, is still the Stan dard of Orthodoxy, in any of the Reformed Churches? XIV. How the firft Four general Councils come to be fo facred and infallible; when all the fucceeding ones are of fo little Authority with us? XV. Why Athanafius must be esteem'd almost infallible, while thofe much greater and more learned Men, Origen, Eufebius, and Apollinarius are rejected as Heretical, without Examination? XVI. XVI. Why fo many of the ancient Books are loft? and in particular why almost all the Arian and Apollinarian Writings are utterly perifhed? XVII. Why do we cry out against the Socinians, for fetting up buman Reasonings again plain Teftimonies, when fo much of our Modern Belief is wholly built on buman Reasonings against as plain Teftimonies alfo? XVIII. Why do we cry out against the Papifts, for taking away the Cup, and for Prayers in a ftrange Tougue, notwithstanding the Inftitution and Command in Scripture, while we affert Joh.XIV. that the Father is not Greater then the Son, and that the Son was not ignorant of the Day of Judgment, 36. Mar. notwithstanding our Lord's own exprefs DeclaXIII. 32. rations to the contrary? 28. Mat. XXIV. XIX. How the implicit Faith in General Councils, nay in Athanafius, and in the Church of Rome as to these Matters, is confiftent with the owning the Proteftant Rule of Faith, the Holy Scriptures; with the Duty of all to search thofe Scriptures; and with our Belief that the Church of Rome is Antichriftian? XX. Why the Difputants for the common Notions, never ftate and prove the meaning of the Words they use and Reason from? fuch as Θεός υιός μονογενής· ἀΐδιΘ' αιώνιΘ' ψυχή κτίζειν κτίσμα ποιεῖν· ποίημα γεννάν γυνηγός θυητός. &c. nor thew that the modern Signification of them is the fame in this Controverfy that it was in the firft Ages of the Gospel? especially when the whole Controverfy turns upon the right ftating the fame? XXI. Why the Athanafians fo often charge the Arians with falfifying the Scripture, and Ancient Authors, without the leaft Proof? while is notorious that they have themselves been fo wicked, in this Matter. But But to return to the Series of my Hiftory. After I had made my entire Extract out of the acknowledg'd Books of the New Teftament, and of the two first Centuries, I, upon fome Occafion, met with an excellent Book concerning thefe matters, which is own'd to be near Seventy Years older than the Council of Nice, and rather earlier than the Council of Antioch, and which is entituled Novatian's Treatife of the Trinity: tho' the word Trinity be not in it; nor does it on any fufficient Evidence appear to be Novatian's. Upon the perufal of this noble Work, written by a learned Catholick, from the known Rule of Faith and from the Scriptures, against some Hereticks of those times, and which is the only large and judicious Book of fo great Antiquity upon that Subject now Extant in the Church; I was exceedingly pleas'd to find there, almost in every Thing the very fame Account of the Original Doctrines of the Gofpel, as to these Matters, which I had before learn'd and collected from the more ancient Teftimonies: and fo I was fecure,that, for the main at least, I had not mistaken the most Primitive Opinions thereto relating. But the Confirmation I received from the Book afcrib'd to Novatian, was nothing in Comparison of what I received foon after from the Apoftolical Conftitutions. For about the beginning of July this Year, my Learned Friend (to whofe honeft, impartial, and laborious Affiftance and Sagacity, I am too deeply indebted, to be ever able to make a fuitable Return;) coming one Day to fee me, brought along with him. a Paper, wherein he had tranfcrib'd feveral Paffages, favourable to the Arian Opinions, from the fame Conftitutions: (a Work which to that Day, as far as I can remember, I had never feen in all my life) and desired me to look a little into that 1 that Book, the best Edition whereof he had gotten, and offer'd to lend me. I well remember that my first Answer to him was, that I did not care to meddle with fpurious or grofly interpolated Writings; fuch as I perceiv'd thofe Conftitutions were generally efteem'd to be by the Learned; but had much rather confine my felf to Authors really genuine and uncorrupt. Yet upon his fhewing me withal a fmall Prayer or Collect tranfcrib'd thence alfo; which I could not but readily own to be moft pious, primitive, and affectionate in its Compofition; I was perfuaded to borrow and perufe that Work. And indeed I do not know that I was ever fo perfectly furpriz'd and mightily pleas'd in all my Life: To find fo compleat and large a Book, fo plainly facred, and belonging to the Companions of the Apostles, if not to the Apoftles themselves; fo full of the Simplicity, Piety, Honefty, Strictnefs, and Discipline of the most Primitive Ages; and yet fo little known, and of fo little Efteem among us, was very amazing. Tho'indeed this Difregard, as I foon perceiv'd, was principally on Account of that old plain Chritianity or Arianifm contain'd in it, without the leaft Colour for any of thofe Novel Notions or Expreffions which Philofophy began to introduce in the very Second Century; and which advanc'd to a mighty Syftem in the Fourth, under the Conduct of Athanafius. And I could hardly tell how to forgive my felf as a Clergyman, (fo I then us'd to exprefs my felf,) when I confider'd how long I had been in Holy Orders, without fo much as once feeing or perufing fo inestimable a Work. For I foon found that, as it does moft plainly put an end to almoft all the Difputes that are now among Chriftians, fo that, at the lowest Suppofition poffible, its Au |